A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » Weightwatchers
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Beyond Personal Responsibility"



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old June 12th, 2004, 01:12 AM
Larry Bud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Beyond Personal Responsibility"

jmk wrote in message ...
On 6/5/2004 11:37 AM, Radley Balko wrote:

Congress is now considering menu-labeling legislation, which would
force restaurants to send every menu item to the laboratory for nutritional
testing.

This is the wrong way to fight obesity. Instead of manipulating or
intervening in the array of food options available to American consumers,
our government ought to be working to foster a sense of responsibility in
and ownership of our own health and well-being. But we're doing just the
opposite.


How is having restaurants provide nutritional information so that
consumers can more easily make educated choices not fostering a sense of
responsibility?


The responsibility lied completely with the consumer. If a restaurant
doesn't provide nutritional information, then the consumer needs to
take that into account in deciding whether or not to eat that food.
  #12  
Old June 12th, 2004, 07:03 PM
Miss Violette
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Beyond Personal Responsibility"

as a person who fills vending machines for a living, I will tell you that
junk is a much easier buck, but if you put in the right "better" foods kids
will buy them more than adults, raisins and sunflower meats come to mind,
and from what I am seeing and hearing a part of the problem is the nasty
food fed to kids now. My mother has taken a partime job in the lunch rooms
of the school district and sister is a substitute teacher, they confirm what
the children tell me, one good meal in about seven, Lee
Fred wrote in message
...
And how does one make reasonable and responsible decisions if the food
at restaurants is not labeled. What the hell is wrong with banning
(in the words of this article's author) JUNK FOODS from school vending
machines?

What is wrong with funding bike paths and building sidewalks.
Socialism? Labeled foodstuffs - how, well, communistic!

Sheesh..............

On 5 Jun 2004 15:37:30 -0000, Radley Balko
wrote:

This June, Time magazine and ABC News will host a three-day summit on
obesity. ABC News anchor Peter Jennings, who last December anchored the
prime time special "How to Get Fat Without Really Trying," will host.
Judging by the scheduled program, the summit promises to be pep rally for
media, nutrition activists, and policy makers -- all agitating for a
panoply of government anti-obesity initiatives, including prohibiting

junk
food in school vending machines, federal funding for new bike trails and
sidewalks, more demanding labels on foodstuffs, restrictive food

marketing
to children, and prodding the food industry into more "responsible"
behavior. In other words, bringing government between you and your
waistline.

Politicians have already climbed aboard. President Bush earmarked $200
million in his budget for anti-obesity measures. State legislatures and
school boards across the country have begun banning snacks and soda from
school campuses and vending machines. Sen. Joe Lieberman and Oakland

Mayor
Jerry Brown, among others, have called for a "fat tax" on high-calorie
foods. Congress is now considering menu-labeling legislation, which would
force restaurants to send every menu item to the laboratory for

nutritional
testing.

This is the wrong way to fight obesity. Instead of manipulating or
intervening in the array of food options available to American consumers,
our government ought to be working to foster a sense of responsibility in
and ownership of our own health and well-being. But we're doing just the
opposite.

For decades now, America's health care system has been migrating toward
socialism. Your well-being, shape, and condition have increasingly been
deemed matters of "public health," instead of matters of personal
responsibility. Our lawmakers just enacted a huge entitlement that

requires
some people to pay for other people's medicine. Sen. Hillary Clinton just
penned a lengthy article in the New York Times Magazine calling for yet
more federal control of health care. All of the Democrat candidates for
president boasted plans to push health care further into the public

sector.
More and more, states are preventing private health insurers from

charging
overweight and obese clients higher premiums, which effectively removes

any
financial incentive for maintaining a healthy lifestyle.

We're becoming less responsible for our own health, and more responsible
for everyone else's. Your heart attack drives up the cost of my premiums
and office visits. And if the government is paying for my

anti-cholesterol
medication, what incentive is there for me to put down the cheeseburger?

This collective ownership of private health then paves the way for even
more federal restrictions on consumer choice and civil liberties. A

society
where everyone is responsible for everyone else's well-being is a society
more apt to accept government restrictions, for example -- on what
McDonalds can put on its menu, what Safeway or Kroger can put on grocery
shelves, or holding food companies responsible for the bad habits of
unhealthy consumers.

A growing army of nutritionist activists and food industry foes are

egging
the process on. Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public
Interest has said, "we've got to move beyond 'personal responsibility.'"
The largest organization of trial lawyers now encourages its members to
weed jury pools of candidates who show "personal responsibility bias."

The
title of Jennings' special from last December -- "How to Get Fat Without
Really Trying" -- reveals his intent, which is to relieve viewers of
responsibility for their own condition. Indeed, Jennings ended the

program
with an impassioned plea for government intervention to fight obesity.

The best way to alleviate the obesity "public health" crisis is to remove
obesity from the realm of public health. It doesn't belong there. It's
difficult to think of anything more private and of less public concern

than
what we choose to put into our bodies. It only becomes a public matter

when
we force the public to pay for the consequences of those choices. If
policymakers want to fight obesity, they'll halt the creeping

socialization
of medicine, and move to return individual Americans' ownership of their
own health and well-being back to individual Americans.

That means freeing insurance companies to reward healthy lifestyles, and
penalize poor ones. It means halting plans to further socialize medicine
and health care. Congress should also increase access to medical and

health
savings accounts, which give consumers the option of rolling money

reserved
for health care into a retirement account. These accounts introduce
accountability into the health care system, and encourage caution with
one's health care dollar. When money we spend on health care doesn't

belong
to our employer or the government, but is money we could devote to our

own
retirement, we're less likely to run to the doctor at the first sign of a
cold.

We'll all make better choices about diet, exercise, and personal health
when someone else isn't paying for the consequences of those choices.





  #13  
Old June 14th, 2004, 04:25 AM
OtherDeb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Beyond Personal Responsibility"

Y'know, we are just talking about this in class (I'm taking Human
Nutrition). Here in NY they put vending machines in the locker rooms in
schools, and the vending machines sell Snapple's "Juiced" and their bottled
water. The "Juiced" product is basically sugar water, with juice for
flavoring. It's no better than Coca Cola, but it's being touted as a
healthier option. This makes me furious. I am, in fact, refusing to
purchase any Snapple products because of it.

--
DEBORAH WUNDER
"Fred" wrote in message
...
Thanks for the confirmation.

On Sat, 12 Jun 2004 13:03:52 -0500, "Miss Violette"
wrote:

as a person who fills vending machines for a living, I will tell you that
junk is a much easier buck, but if you put in the right "better" foods

kids
will buy them more than adults, raisins and sunflower meats come to mind,
and from what I am seeing and hearing a part of the problem is the nasty
food fed to kids now. My mother has taken a partime job in the lunch

rooms
of the school district and sister is a substitute teacher, they confirm

what
the children tell me, one good meal in about seven, Lee
Fred wrote in message
.. .
And how does one make reasonable and responsible decisions if the food
at restaurants is not labeled. What the hell is wrong with banning
(in the words of this article's author) JUNK FOODS from school vending
machines?

What is wrong with funding bike paths and building sidewalks.
Socialism? Labeled foodstuffs - how, well, communistic!

Sheesh..............

On 5 Jun 2004 15:37:30 -0000, Radley Balko
wrote:

This June, Time magazine and ABC News will host a three-day summit on
obesity. ABC News anchor Peter Jennings, who last December anchored

the
prime time special "How to Get Fat Without Really Trying," will host.
Judging by the scheduled program, the summit promises to be pep rally

for
media, nutrition activists, and policy makers -- all agitating for a
panoply of government anti-obesity initiatives, including prohibiting

junk
food in school vending machines, federal funding for new bike trails

and
sidewalks, more demanding labels on foodstuffs, restrictive food

marketing
to children, and prodding the food industry into more "responsible"
behavior. In other words, bringing government between you and your
waistline.

Politicians have already climbed aboard. President Bush earmarked $200
million in his budget for anti-obesity measures. State legislatures

and
school boards across the country have begun banning snacks and soda

from
school campuses and vending machines. Sen. Joe Lieberman and Oakland

Mayor
Jerry Brown, among others, have called for a "fat tax" on high-calorie
foods. Congress is now considering menu-labeling legislation, which

would
force restaurants to send every menu item to the laboratory for

nutritional
testing.

This is the wrong way to fight obesity. Instead of manipulating or
intervening in the array of food options available to American

consumers,
our government ought to be working to foster a sense of responsibility

in
and ownership of our own health and well-being. But we're doing just

the
opposite.

For decades now, America's health care system has been migrating

toward
socialism. Your well-being, shape, and condition have increasingly

been
deemed matters of "public health," instead of matters of personal
responsibility. Our lawmakers just enacted a huge entitlement that

requires
some people to pay for other people's medicine. Sen. Hillary Clinton

just
penned a lengthy article in the New York Times Magazine calling for

yet
more federal control of health care. All of the Democrat candidates

for
president boasted plans to push health care further into the public

sector.
More and more, states are preventing private health insurers from

charging
overweight and obese clients higher premiums, which effectively

removes
any
financial incentive for maintaining a healthy lifestyle.

We're becoming less responsible for our own health, and more

responsible
for everyone else's. Your heart attack drives up the cost of my

premiums
and office visits. And if the government is paying for my

anti-cholesterol
medication, what incentive is there for me to put down the

cheeseburger?

This collective ownership of private health then paves the way for

even
more federal restrictions on consumer choice and civil liberties. A

society
where everyone is responsible for everyone else's well-being is a

society
more apt to accept government restrictions, for example -- on what
McDonalds can put on its menu, what Safeway or Kroger can put on

grocery
shelves, or holding food companies responsible for the bad habits of
unhealthy consumers.

A growing army of nutritionist activists and food industry foes are

egging
the process on. Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public
Interest has said, "we've got to move beyond 'personal

responsibility.'"
The largest organization of trial lawyers now encourages its members

to
weed jury pools of candidates who show "personal responsibility bias."

The
title of Jennings' special from last December -- "How to Get Fat

Without
Really Trying" -- reveals his intent, which is to relieve viewers of
responsibility for their own condition. Indeed, Jennings ended the

program
with an impassioned plea for government intervention to fight obesity.

The best way to alleviate the obesity "public health" crisis is to

remove
obesity from the realm of public health. It doesn't belong there. It's
difficult to think of anything more private and of less public concern

than
what we choose to put into our bodies. It only becomes a public matter

when
we force the public to pay for the consequences of those choices. If
policymakers want to fight obesity, they'll halt the creeping

socialization
of medicine, and move to return individual Americans' ownership of

their
own health and well-being back to individual Americans.

That means freeing insurance companies to reward healthy lifestyles,

and
penalize poor ones. It means halting plans to further socialize

medicine
and health care. Congress should also increase access to medical and

health
savings accounts, which give consumers the option of rolling money

reserved
for health care into a retirement account. These accounts introduce
accountability into the health care system, and encourage caution with
one's health care dollar. When money we spend on health care doesn't

belong
to our employer or the government, but is money we could devote to our

own
retirement, we're less likely to run to the doctor at the first sign

of a
cold.

We'll all make better choices about diet, exercise, and personal

health
when someone else isn't paying for the consequences of those choices.







  #14  
Old June 14th, 2004, 01:39 PM
Crazy Bastard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Beyond Personal Responsibility"

"Lady Veteran" wrote in message
...
Notice hoe it is only fat people that are being called upon to take
some sort of individual responsibility? I have a serious problem with
that because it generalizes. There are some people that refuse to be
responsible and it has nothing to do with how much a person weighs.


Fat people are a HUGE problem. They are less productive and that costs
everybody money. They are less healthy and that costs everybody money.
They usually smell bad and that's no fun.

- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------


Fat people need 24/7 supervision so STOP EATING SO ****ING MUCH!


  #15  
Old June 14th, 2004, 06:54 PM
Lady Veteran
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Beyond Personal Responsibility"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:39:06 GMT, "Crazy *******"
wrote:

"Lady Veteran" wrote in message
.. .
Notice hoe it is only fat people that are being called upon to
take some sort of individual responsibility? I have a serious
problem with that because it generalizes. There are some people
that refuse to be responsible and it has nothing to do with how
much a person weighs.


Fat people are a HUGE problem. They are less productive and that
costs everybody money. They are less healthy and that costs
everybody money. They usually smell bad and that's no fun.


Everything is all black and white in your world?

Oh, I forgot. Your brain isn't large enough to process color.

Too bad.

LV


Lady Veteran
- -----------------------------------
"I rode a tank and held a general's rank
when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank..."
- -Rolling Stones, Sympathy for the Devil
- ------------------------------------------------
People who hide behind anonymous remailers and
ridicule fat people are cowardly idiots with no
motive but malice.
- ---------------------------------------------
"To Do Is To Be" Socrates
"To Be Is To Do" Plato
"Do Be Do Be Do" Sinatra
- -------------------------------


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 8.0 - not licensed for commercial use: www.pgp.com

iQA/AwUBQM3mWMjazA1WMM1JEQLvjgCg/CA5U0fy8/5ZmNTRC0N88L4pdoEAn3mD
RoLgYGjgA/IVb2433F3CXBk7
=mq96
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

  #16  
Old June 14th, 2004, 10:14 PM
Crazy Bastard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default "Beyond Personal Responsibility"

"Lady Veteran" wrote in message
...
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, 14 Jun 2004 12:39:06 GMT, "Crazy *******"
wrote:
"Lady Veteran" wrote in message
.. .
Notice hoe it is only fat people that are being called upon to
take some sort of individual responsibility? I have a serious
problem with that because it generalizes. There are some people
that refuse to be responsible and it has nothing to do with how
much a person weighs.

Fat people are a HUGE problem. They are less productive and that
costs everybody money. They are less healthy and that costs
everybody money. They usually smell bad and that's no fun.

Everything is all black and white in your world?
Oh, I forgot. Your brain isn't large enough to process color.
Too bad.


What the **** does black, white and color have to do with FAT PEOPLE???

Fat people are fat people, it doesn't matter what color they are!

What the **** is wrong with you???

Its a fact: Fat people miss more work days than healthy people.

Its a fact: Fat people steal from the poor by eating too much food!

Its a fact: Fat people have MORE health problems than healthy people, that
increases healthcare costs which ALL PEOPLE have to bear. As a healthy
person I object to having to pay more to cover the increased cost of FAT
PEOPLE.

Its a fact: Fat people don't fit in airplane seats!!

Its a fact: Fat people sweat more, they smell.

Its a fact: The aroma from the sweaty ass crack of a FAT PERSON could clear
a stadium!

Its a fact: Fat people are hard to wrestle to the ground.

Its a fact: ****ing a fat broad is a workout!!

Its a fact: Fat people should sit in the last row of a movie theatre so they
don't block the view.

Its a fact: If you were in trouble you could bend a fat person over and
show a movie on their ass!!!

Its a fact: After the Apocalypse fat people can be rendered for fuel. And
it doesn't matter if they are black, or white or ****ing colorful!!!



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Beyond Personal Responsibility" Radley Balko Low Carbohydrate Diets 46 June 14th, 2004 10:14 PM
#1 Site on Self-help and Personal Developmet Olav Mehl Ludvigsen Low Carbohydrate Diets 1 January 4th, 2004 11:41 PM
#1 Site on Self-help and Personal Developmet Olav Mehl Ludvigsen Weightwatchers 0 January 4th, 2004 06:16 PM
#1 Site on Self-help and Personal Developmet Olav Mehl Ludvigsen Medications related to Weight Control 0 January 4th, 2004 06:16 PM
#1 Site on Self-help and Personal Developmet Olav Mehl Ludvigsen Fit For Life 0 January 4th, 2004 06:16 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.